Windancer Posted March 24, 2013 Report Share Posted March 24, 2013 (edited) If you use the metric system, would it not make more sense for you to measure your fuel mileage in km per L? I am certainly not cticizing the age old MPG or the American system, but the Canadian version of L/100 is slightly more accurate because it measures actual consumption vs. how far you may go, which is a hypothetical distance. One gives fuel per distance, while the other gives distance per fuel. If you care to read more on this go to: http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/05/24/mpg-vs-l100km/. It was written by an American. A more acurate way might be gallons/100 miles which of course would really screw things up. Terry Edited March 24, 2013 by Windancer Journey_SeXT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidlb512 Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 I am certainly not cticizing the age old MPG or the American system, but the Canadian version of L/100 is slightly more accurate because it measures actual consumption vs. how far you may go, which is a hypothetical distance. One gives fuel per distance, while the other gives distance per fuel.If you care to read more on this go to: http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/05/24/mpg-vs-l100km/. It was written by an American. A more acurate way might be gallons/100 miles which of course would really screw things up. Terry Any criticism aside of Emperical vs Metric systems aside. How exactly could saying 10.2L/100km possibly be more accurate than 9.8kmpL? Being in the U.S. Army, I am very accustomed to the Metric system, as we use it rather than Emperical. And by the way, I have a feeling the person that wrote that article may have never solved a math problem correctly in their life. Haha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windancer Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) Any criticism aside of Emperical vs Metric systems aside. How exactly could saying 10.2L/100km possibly be more accurate than 9.8kmpL? Being in the U.S. Army, I am very accustomed to the Metric system, as we use it rather than Emperical. And by the way, I have a feeling the person that wrote that article may have never solved a math problem correctly in their life. Haha. With all due respect, I beg to differ, but saying 10.2L/100km is much diferent than saying 9.8kmpL. The first expression is based on CONSUMPTION and is a an actual number, An actual number of kms. (100) and an actual quantity of fuel (10.2 liters) It takes to travel 100kms. no more no less. The 9.8kmpL is a hypothetical number, we do not know if it was derived from a distance of 1km, 10 kms, 100 kms or a 1000 kms, it is an average! In my old Caravan there was an instantaneous reading of mileage. Was it accurate? Not sure it was year 2000 technology. Even if it was, what did it tell you other that at that precise moment you were getting a certain mileage! A number like 9.8kmpL is derived from an average of these instantaneous readings, some will be better than 9.8kmpL and some will be worse than 9.8kmpL. Obviously the more readings or the greater the overall mileage the more accurate the MPG or the KmpL will be. Quite frankly it's not the articles author's math I would question, I am sure he has solved numerous math problems. A point to consider I have been buying gas in the metric system since Canada adopted the metric system in 1977 so I feel relatively confident about metric conversion. Terry Edited March 28, 2013 by Windancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtsr Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 (edited) It would seem with the warmer temps and fuel supply changing to summer/warm wx formulation mpg/L per 100km is improving. Actual hand figured results for my last tank filled as always to auto shutoff. Edited April 19, 2013 by bigtsr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webslave Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 I find the debate about the result of fuel usage calculations interesting. Since both results are the end product of the same calculated products, the answers are both legitimate and accurate. The car takes fuel used/being used and distance covered and calculates the results (either at that moment or over some period of time). Neither is inherently more accurate than the other, just the expression of the result changes. I have my system reporting in mpg (I'm in PA and the US mph numbers are larger on my dash; easier to read), so, I get two different mpg readings, a "lifetime" (unless I hit the reset by mistake) and an instantaneous. Both only as accurate as the fuel usage meter and distance covered meters are. If I switch to the metric settings, it uses the same meters, but, changes the output via conversion. Neither is more "accurate", only the relationship of the output. My "lifetime" reading right now is 21.6 mpg which is the same as 10.89L/100km. Expression of the end product doesn't change the actual product, i.e., in the 21.6 mpg or 10.89L/100km relationship it is also equal to 4.62 gal/100 mi or .1089L/km. Accuracy of any of the expressions is based on the same two meter readings. It is just a matter of what you are used to wrapping your mind around as far as interpretation of that result; accuracy remains the same. We, in the US are accustomed to expressing fuel efficiency by the mpg computation and until the government starts expressing fuel consumption by vehicles in a different manner, we will remain most comfortable using that expression and as long as we are comparing mpg to mpg it is everybit as accurate for determining efficiency as any other method. 21.6 is more efficient than 16 mpg and not as efficient as 26.8 mpg which is all the accuracy you can get from the devices in these vehicles; they are not lab quality and are useful only in a rough indication of how well your vehicle is using fuel, regardless of whether the output of the calculation is mpg or l/100km. A rose by any other name... No argument intended in the above, just a musing by a reader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolly Posted May 20, 2013 Report Share Posted May 20, 2013 I just did 646 km's on the highway this weekend and got 9L/100kms. My previous best was 10.2L/100kms. The mileage has steadily improved since the 8000 km mark. I still haven't been able to put more than 58 litres, even though the fuel light comes on and it reads 41 kms to empty! Doesn't make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onecrazyfoo4u Posted May 20, 2013 Report Share Posted May 20, 2013 Just installed a K&N air filter and drove 500 miles. Increased my average from 24mpg to 26mpg (going off of both the EVIC and hand calculations). I must say, this filter may pay for itself fairly quickly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender007 Posted May 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2013 I'm still around 21L/100kms 100%city driving on an R/T with 15k kms on the clock. I'm tempted to return it next year when the lease is over but I feel sorry giving it back with such low mileage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 21, 2013 Report Share Posted May 21, 2013 Im see a little improvment on mine... I dont know if its because i change gas company that im using.. Before i use co-op gas since i tried shell it improves from ave 24L/100km to 17L/100km not sure if the gas itself or because its summer now or the car is breaking-in. Hopefully it continue to improve until it gets what its saying in the sticker! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey_SeXT Posted May 21, 2013 Report Share Posted May 21, 2013 Im see a little improvment on mine... I dont know if its because i change gas company that im using.. Before i use co-op gas since i tried shell it improves from ave 24L/100km to 17L/100km not sure if the gas itself or because its summer now or the car is breaking-in. Hopefully it continue to improve until it gets what its saying in the sticker! At least your numbers are now starting to look like city driving consumption....stick with the Shell gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 21, 2013 Report Share Posted May 21, 2013 Thats good idea, stick with shell, but for curiosity i wanna go back to cOop on my next fill. just to confirm if the gas was the reason.. If it went high again atleast i got conclusion. As what i observe i have three factors on improvement. Maybe summer season, gas, Or it might be engine broken in.. 17 cents/L is the diff. against coop gas! I'll post for an update! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey_SeXT Posted May 23, 2013 Report Share Posted May 23, 2013 17 cents is quite the difference which I have never seen here even with the most low budget private gas stations. Maybe it's just me but I would never let any of my vehicles fill up with gas that isn't top tier regardless of the difference in cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 23, 2013 Report Share Posted May 23, 2013 Yeah i was also shocked about the gas price difference, it might be general price hike.. I dont know. I will check price from time to time. What made you decided to stay on top tier gas. Is it because of classy mentality or it make huge difference in the long run.. Im cheap.. Please give reason to convince me on using top tier gas! :-)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey_SeXT Posted May 24, 2013 Report Share Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) Top tier gas are fuels with higher amounts of cleaning additives added which is better for your engine in the long run..... you can read more about it here: http://www.toptiergas.com/ Edited May 24, 2013 by Journey_SeXT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender007 Posted May 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2013 Im see a little improvment on mine... I dont know if its because i change gas company that im using.. Before i use co-op gas since i tried shell it improves from ave 24L/100km to 17L/100km not sure if the gas itself or because its summer now or the car is breaking-in. Hopefully it continue to improve until it gets what its saying in the sticker! I've used Ultramar, Esso, and Petro-Canada and I never saw a difference. I doubt Shell would jump your economy that much. Maybe I should try it on my next fillup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 26, 2013 Report Share Posted May 26, 2013 Same, here i dont think its the shell gas that improved it.. I think more on weather.. As i observe pentestar engine sucks on winters,.. But when you use shell gas let us know how did it affect fuel economy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windancer Posted May 26, 2013 Report Share Posted May 26, 2013 I'm still around 21L/100kms 100%city driving on an R/T with 15k kms on the clock. I'm tempted to return it next year when the lease is over but I feel sorry giving it back with such low mileage IMHO that is still much too high, there is no doubt winter driving in the city gives us very poor mileage up here. Personally I would be very bothered by such a high number. As I have said many times, if you check the My Fuelly badge below my post, it shows my personal mileage from Day 1 back in August 2010. Yes some of my winter fillups were very poor due to long idling or warm ups. I have run premium gas through it and gotten slightly better mileage but not enough times to say conclusively. I went out to my cottage yesterday which is only 50 miles out and obviously 50 back and my EVIC was hovering around the 11.6L/100kms mark so IMO the car is very capable of decent mileage. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Yeah,Thats the other reason on driving us nuts! Our journey is having pentestar engine wich should be more fuel efficient "as advertised" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quademire87 Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 I'm pretty impressed with the mileage I've been getting. From southwest Minnesota to the north shore I got 27 mpg according to the evic. Drove around the big hills in Duluth for 3 days before filling up and was down to 25 mpg on the evic for that tank. Ran the numbers by hand and was pretty close. I reset the evic before we embarked on our journey, and was amazed that my mileage kept getting better the faster we went, haha. By the time I was north of the twin cities, I had the cruise set at 76mph and the instant mileage was consistently over 30. Keep in mind this is with my family of 4, and luggage for a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webslave Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 I've been extremely pleased with the mileage in my '13 R/T also (bear in mind that I went from the Hemi in the Commander to the Pentastar in the DJ). Real average (hand computed) of 21.9 - 22.7 mpg (10.74 - 10.36 L/100 km) "around town" (we live in the boonies - avg speeds on the roads is 40-60 mph, winding, up hill and down hill and "town" consists of a handful of blocks with one stoplight) and as much as 29 mpg (8.11 L/100 km) on the highway to Pittsburgh and back. For the weight of the car, the winding roads and the mountains around here, I certainly can't complain. The EVIC, which I haven't cleared since we bought the car last year (ordered the end of October 2012 and received early December 2012) is showing an "average", to date, of 22.6 mpg (10.41 L/100 km), I'm happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Very impressive for '13 r/t.. Im still kinda disappointed in mine.. Im driving her as gentle as i could but still it's evic sits on 18.2 L/100kms.. Trying everything to get better fuel economy but no go. Schedule my 1st 250 km road trip tomorrow. My plan is to reset the evic once we are on highway to see how it comsume on pure highway! But 18.2 L/km on 80% city driving is still high on my expectation. Driving it really gentle and didnt even enjoying its power is sacrificing on my part for fuel economy. Im afraid if i enjoy its v6 power when driving give me heart atttack on fuel economy.. Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windancer Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Chris Sorry but I still think your mileage is too high, did you have your car put on the computer at a Dodge dealership? I should of let you know I was in town on Monday but I drove up in my summer toy. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Crappy dealership... Break-in thing is bullshit on my opinion because theres a lot of 2013 r/t on forum having decent fuel economy, even when i check on fuelly mine is the all time worst in fuel economy... Im tired of talking to them having excuses that im under my break in period thats why they cant do anything with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris1276 Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Nice summer toy by the way, :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redtomatoman Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Just set a new record for my 2011. 30.9 mpg on a trip from Gallup to Durango. Cruise set at 70mph with AC on. Pretty darn good. Peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.